My half of the "Rhetorical Analysis With Molly Tate"

Hill and Barclay are very historically factual during most of this article. They never refer to themselves or anyone else in general for that matter. This article would have been better if the authors, Hill and Barclay, would have given some real life examples about their experiences with “Cajun” food, instead of spewing historical facts, because when a reader thinks of Louisiana cuisine, they think of warm and friendly hospitality to also be a part of that. Historical facts aren’t that warm and friendly. They did, however, ended this article with a recipe which gives it a warm and friendly vibe that can only be described as using southern mannerisms.

            Hill and Barclay use a very lose, but connected structure. They do not go through each time period of Louisiana’s cuisine experience, but they do eventually end up talking about them. This is almost as if written a stream-of-conscious writing. If one time period is similar to another than they tie them together because of that similar fact. The authors talk about how the French, German, Spanish, Acadian, Caribbean, Irish, African, and Italian influence the cuisine, but not in any specific order. They jump around from one ingredient and cultural influence to another.

            Hill and Barclay finish the article with recipes and it gives the article a more well-rounded and homey feel, but the recipes are randomly put in the middle of the article and are not relevant to the article except for the fact that they Louisiana recipes. Without this simple touch the article would feel to academic and cold leaving the audience completely alienated and confused. When a person thinks of Cajun cuisine, they often think of spicy and warm, the article should almost reciprocate these feels like word painting a meal, this article leaves much to be desired in that aspect. .

Hill, Madalene, and Barclay, Gwen. "From Acadian To Cajun." The Herbarist 74 (2008): 68-73. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Sept. 2014.